This, and the keep/undo flow, forking agent sessions (including renaming them)... The UX could be better at places but the core features of what Cursor has (for someone who came from VS Code) is an unbeatable mix. Really would like to find something else.
I did try Kiro which seems to have the same philosophy but it's just not there. Most of the features I like in Cursor are missing.
Some other commenters mentioned that VS Code + Copilot would be better these days. Dunno.
I am also wondering the same thing as OP. Somewhat tangential thought, but I recently realised that what I would really love in an IDE is a "first class" Markdown editing experience, just because most of my day-to-day is managing and writing docs rather than editing code. Cursor has Markdown rendering support of course but it seems to have two implementations, each sort of clunky in their own way. And I want something more WYSIWYG but with Latex / flowchart / etc. support built-in.
OpenKnowledge seems to maybe fill that niche somewhat (it also supports annotating Markdown with comments to feed into an agent), and has agent integration within the GUI, but one killer feature that seems to be missing is Remote SSH support (short of hosting its web server on the remote and having the IDE live in the browser).
In my opinion, this kind of a benchmark doesn't tell much about the models' capabilities on normal software development tasks. It's fun to look at the differences in the output of course, but how often would anyone prompt with very brief instructions, without even hinting the model about caring about any of the details in the outcome nor the implementation?
When there are implicit boundaries, negotiable tradeoffs, taste, whatever, in the mix, then the differences in the model capabilities become way more interesting.
Isn’t that a huge simplification? Of course the way you phrase the prompt can carry semantic meaning, maybe subtly, but still. And sometimes that matters a little and sometimes a lot. I’ve stopped numerous agent sessions over the last few weeks to reword my initial prompt to get the agent off an unintended track.
This. I gather interesting posts this way in my browser tabs in the phone and everytime I finish reading something I click "Back" and there's usually a discussion there, unless I opened the link originally from somewhere else than HN.
> Help people when they explicitly ask for help. When someone asks, the cause and effect reverse. You’re no longer imposing your judgment on someone who never wanted it.
Maybe this is why pull request reviews can become contentious. The reviewer thinks the author is open for feedback while in fact it’s just the widely accepted practice and team/company enfored that you are supposed to give feedback.
I don’t understand this take. In my company a lot of the Claude Coders seem to be very uninterested or unaware of the code they are producing, while I in Cursor usually click ”Keep”/”Undo” on specific code blocks (with little edits) or sometimes the whole file at once if it’s a low risk part of the codebase. I fail to see how this workflow produces inferior code vs shooting in the blind and maybe skimming a huge diff in one go.
I've found most hackathons not personally fulfilling because you can only get small stuff done and finalize maybe a happy path or two, accompanied by some rushed slides, before you run out of time. The AI really changes this and you can actually deeply exhaust an idea.
I did try Kiro which seems to have the same philosophy but it's just not there. Most of the features I like in Cursor are missing.
Some other commenters mentioned that VS Code + Copilot would be better these days. Dunno.